SA Footy

Heres one for the tennis experts[I am not one of them]
Is Roger FEDERER the best ever.
I reckon Bjorn BORG was the best
Rod LAVER was right up there
Pete SAMPRAS must be in the equation.

Im sticking my head out and pick Bjorn BORG.
I reckon his oppostion was better, Mcenroe and Connors were good opposition.
FEDERER may end up being the best performed but best player ?
FEDERER seems to only have HEWITT and RODDICK as his main opposition[Nadal on clay as well has his moments]

Experts ?

I enjoy a little bit of tennis, but no expert.
I think he isn't there yet, ask this question in a few years and an answer will be given.

Bit early to say yet mal, 7 or 8 years ago Sampras was similarly regarded as the best ever, but now i think he'd only be classed as 3rd or 4th at best. Then we've got Agassi who on his day was unbeatable, but doesn't really have the record of some others.

If Federer can keep his current form up for another 4 to 5 years, and theres no reason why he couldn't, then i think we may be able to say hes certainly right up there, and maybe the best ever, but too early just yet.

Borg winning 5 Wimbledons in a row certainly added to his legend, but i think he damaged his reputation by making a come back and doing nothing. Although not winning as many consecutive Wimbledons, Sampras' Wimbledon record is probably just as impressive, and i'm sure that Federer's Wimbledon record at the end of his career will surpass Borg's as well.

He's a freak like Tiger Woods or Michael Schumacher...
But like my late Grandfather, he's Swiss.
So Rock on Roger!

For pure genius and artistry, it comes down to, in chronological order...

Laver
Borg
McEnroe
Sampras
Federer

Nobody else has dominated tennis like these five champions.

Lendl (sp?) any one? Ivan dominated a vast period of the late 80's,paving the way for the new style of tennis adopted by Becker,Agassi,Sampras and co.Big serve,fine technique and constant pressure.For mine,Federer is behind Sampras in my living memory.Cant argue with mal though,any one old enough to remember Borj must be wise to the world.

GRAND SLAMS.....BORG......MCENROE......SAMPRAS..........LAVER...........FEDERER............LENDL.........AGASSI

MATCHES WON:....141...........167..............203.........................................112................222.............224

MATCHES LOST:....16.............38...............38............................................21.................49...............53

FRENCH OPEN:......6...............R.U..............S.F....................2.....................R.U................3.................1

WIMBELDON:........5................3.................7.......................4....................4....................R.U.............1

U.S.OPEN:.............4R.............4..................5......................2.....................3...................3.................4

AUST. OPEN:.........3R.............S.F...............2.......................3.....................2...................2.................2

BORG AGAINST MCENROE 7-7 NEWCOMBE 0-3. BORG HAD A 90% WIN RATIO IN GRAND SLAMS. WON 41 MATCHES IN A ROW AT WIMBLEDON FOR 5 CONSECUTIVE WINS

MCENROE AGAINST SAMPRAS 0-3 BECKER 2-8 LENDL 15-21

SAMPRAS Q.F. MATCH AGAINST AGASSI 2001 U.S. OPEN 6-7 7-6 7-6 7-6 NO SERVICE GAME WAS BROKEN.

LAVER WINNER OF ALL GRAND SLAMS IN ONE YEAR TWICE.

FEDERER WINNING STREAK AT WIMBLEDON IS 48. HAS WON 7 DOUBLES TITLES FROM 2001 TO 2005

LENDL'S BIGGEST DISSAPPOINTMENT NOT WINNING WIMBLEDON. HAS 5 DAUGHTERS

AGASSI'S FATHER REPRESENTED IRAN IN BOXING AT THE OLYMPICS IN 48,52


DON'T KNOW IF THIS HELPS TO PROVIDE THE BEST PLAYER BUT FOR ME IT WOULD BE LAVER, SAMPRAS, BORG, FEDERER, MCENROE, AGASSI, LENDL

He might not be the best yet but I think give him another couple of years and he will be elevated to legend status. For now he is a absolute champion, never loses his cool.

AND ON THE FEMALE SIDE.MARGERET COURT..MARTINA NAV........BILLIE JEAN KING........STEFFI GRAF.....CHRIS EVERT

GRAND SLAMS...................S.....D...M.............S......D.......M.............S......D......M..................S.....D..............S......D.

FRENCH OPEN:...................3....4....4..............2.......7........2............1.....1.......2...................6......0..............7.......2

WIMBLEDON:.....................3.....2....5.............9.......7........4............6......10.....4...................7......1..............3.......1

U.S. OPEN:.........................5.....4....8.............4........9.......3............4.......5......4..................5......0..............6.......1

AUST OPEN:.......................11....8....4.............3........8.......1............1......R.U....1.................4......0...............2........0

RUNNER UP IN G/SLAMS......5.....14...4............14..............................6.....13......7................14......3..............16......2


SURPRISINGLY MARGERET COURT AND BILLIE JEAN KING PLAYED ALL 3 TYPES SINGLES, DOUBLES, MIXED AT GRAND SLAMS.

STEFFI HARDLY PLAYED DOUBLES OR MIXED IN GRAND SLAMS.

MARTINA HAD A 110 GRAND SLAM CONSECUTIVE WINNING MATCHES WITH PAM SHRIVER.

MARGERET COURT WIN/LOSS AT WIMBLEDON WAS 51-9 AT 85%
1965:GRAND SLAM IN MIXED DOUBLES 1970: GRAND SLAM IN SINGLES.

FOR MY BEST IN ORDER MARGERET COURT, MARTINA, STEFFI GRAF, CHRIS EVERT, BILLIE JEAN KING

Hey M80's, better look up Maureen Connolly's records.

Mr66 wrote:Hey M80's, better look up Maureen Connolly's records.

9 GRAND SLAM WINS

1 OZ OPEN
2 FRENCH
3 WIMBLEDON
3 U.S.

COULD HAVE BEEN ONE OF THE ALL TIME BEST MR66. RETIRED AT 19 AFTER A TRUCK CRUSHED HER LEG WHILE RIDING A HORSE. THEN SHE DIED OF CANCER AT AGE 34 IN 1969.

1953 WON THE 4 GRAND SLAMS.

SHE WAS BEFORE MY TIME MR66

if the FED EX can win a grand slam at Roland Garros then he will certainly put the pressure on to be regarded as best ever. certainly is the best of his era.

Scary to think how many grand slam titles, and grand slams for that matter, Rod Laver would have won had he not turn pro.

FWIW, Bud Collins ranks Laver in his top five along with...

Bill Tilden
Pancho Gonzales
Bjorn Borg
Pete Sampras

Been having this discussion with mates quite often lately ... They all claim Federer is the best, but personally I would take Sampras to this point in time, could well change by the time Federer has collected a few more goats though.

My living memory of watching tennis commences about when Lendl was dominating for an extended period, then players like Edberg and Sampras took the mantle. In my mind what currently separates Federer from those guys is the complete dominance he has over the field which he has had for some time. Whilst those other guys were up there for extended periods, I can't recall even Sampras having such a gap to his nearest rivals (Wimbeldon excluded). Players like Sampras (French) and Lendl (Wimbeldon) never achieved the full house, and Federer still has to win the French but has the game to do so.

I agree the jury needs time on this one but the signs are that Federer will finish his career as the best or he'll be everyone's top list.

For me Federer will be the best but perhaps not there at the moment as far as the stats are concerned compared to Sampras. Taking nothing away from anyone who won a title 20 years or more ago but the game really has changed and is now open to a lot more people around the world so I believe it would be between Sampras and Federer with Roger to be in front at the end of his career.

Federer will go down as the best if he can win the French Open.

He will probably win Wimbeldon and the US again this year and that would take the tally to 12 with those 2 slams !!!

Agree with Blue Boy 100% here on Federer. Unless he triumphs at least once at Roland Garros, he will not be regarded as the best ever.

If he wins that then he will overtake Laver, Borg, McEnroe, Connors, Lendl, Sampras as the greatest.

I dont necessarily agree that Federer needs to win the French to take the title as best ever. Clay is a unique type of surface and very much favours players who grew up playing on that type of court eg Curtin. If Federer finishes up with 20 Grand Slams, but no French titles, i think it would be foolish to say he he wasn't the best ever. Lendl never won Wimbledon and this goes against his career performance but the Wimbledon Championship is the number 1 tournament in the world, the French Open is arguably nowhere near as illustrious. I think Hoad never won the Australian Open, but i know of some people who certainly claim he is in the top 3 players (some say he is the best ever).

FWIW in terms of playing ability (as opposed to stats) I think Federer is very close to the top if not there. He has a complete game in my book. Everytime I watch him play I look for a weakness and thus far the only one I can find is that he is susceptible to a high bouncing ball which he gets plenty of on clay.

Being Swiss he would have plenty of clay court tennis in his history book. He is only 25 at present and this is the only title that has eluded him so far, but there is still plenty of time for that.

The key to the mark of an all time great is their all round ability on different surfaces. Federer has a game to match all surfaces. These days so much tennis is played from the baseline but Federer can manage that or play serve/volley, and use good approach shots to sneak in to the net during a rally. He can make pace, play with pace or take pace off the ball. He has a single handed backhand which he can top or slice. He has a good second serve. He has a focussed temprament. And he has arguably one of the best coaches of all time in Tony Roche for all Grand Slam and Masters Events. He plays slower courts much better than Sampras who relied on pace and brute strength much more.

If Fed Ex can win the slam in the current era of men's tennis he will be marked as a legend instantly.

Re Margaret Court's record, I am always surprised that Rod Laver Arena is not Margaret Court Arena. Is there a court named after Margaret Court? (No jokes about 'tennis Court etc!).